More weapons

[toebar]

Having (too many) more weapons changes the game dynamic from "exploration and food/shelter for survival" to "I wonder what it's like to kill with ."

If I wanted a to play a game about killing with different weapons I would not be playing TLD.

I'd probably be playing Call Of Dummies or Falldown 4.

I too agree with this, the challenge of TLD would be lost, the scarcity of resources and choices is what makes it fun, sticking in loads of weapons you might as well replace the wildlife with zombies.

I also agree, but the thing is, resources are not currently that scarce. You will always end up with extra rifles. When more weapons are suggested, it is also intended that the overall number of weapons stays the same or (even better) is reduced.

[toebar]

Since most trees were/alive alive prior to incident youd have to dry them for a month be4 youd be able to use them without dying from co2 poisoning.

lol.. Are you trying to saying that they won't burn well? if so, then I agree. :lol:

We will have to agree to disagree about being able to chop down a frozen tree.

[cekivi]

My 2 cents: This game does not need handguns. This is Northern BC, not Texas

If people really want them the only thematic weapon would be a shotgun or .22LR for small game hunting. But since the only small game presently in the game (rabbits) can be easily caught with snares it is likely not worth implementing.

[Boston123]

My 2 cents: This game does not need handguns. This is Northern BC, not Texas

If people really want them the only thematic weapon would be a shotgun or .22LR for small game hunting. But since the only small game presently in the game (rabbits) can be easily caught with snares it is likely not worth implementing.

IMO, snares need to be changed, drastically. They are far too successful to be even remotely realistic. A major point about snares in "real life survival" is that you generally need A LOT of them in order to have even a slight chance of catching anything. Myself, I have set out 20+ snares, on three different rabbit runs (that were busy, as I saw both live rabbits and evidence of travel), 7 snares to a run. After 3 days of trapping, checking the snares each day, guess how many rabbits I had? Two.

Many bushpilots in Alaska carry .38 Special revolvers for defense from wolves or other "small" predators. A lightweight revolver that can be tucked under a bushplane seat isn't exactly gamebreaking. Asides, it would be really difficult to hunt with a .38 Special, meaning the only real use for it is for defense against charging wolves.

Same thing for a 12G double-barrel shotgun. Birdshot for small game, buckshot for hunting, slugs for defense against bears. Having 2 shots isn't exactly gamebreaking.

Besides, I think it could actually be interesting to see what effect having different types of firearms with appropriate ammunition has on the playerbase. Imagine: you just started a new game, so you have a .38 Special revolver with 12 rounds. All you find are Rifle rounds. Or, you have a shotgun chambered with birdshot. You can't really hunt anything with it, so is it worth carrying the weight? Or, you have a rifle with 3 rounds in the magazine. All you find is 12G buckshot.

I, for one, find it face-palmingly annoying that ALL the ammunition we find magically fits into every rifle, which is itself always the same. Having some variety would 1) make the player actually make CHOICES when it comes to equipment, and 2) be more true-to-life.

Survival is all about choice, not shoehorning into the "best" option.

Of course, I am still confused as to why we can't make spears yet :roll:

[toebar]

I agree with cekivi AND Boston123 (in part).

It doesn't NEED hand guns. But, adding variety and increasing rarity would make each playthough more different than they are now. It's not about providing choices....it's about forcing them :twisted: Living with the consequences of your actions is part of what makes this game different (except for you save cloners )

[cekivi]

I agree with cekivi AND Boston123 (in part).

It doesn't NEED hand guns. But, adding variety and increasing rarity would make each playthough more different than they are now. It's not about providing choices....it's about forcing them :twisted: Living with the consequences of your actions is part of what makes this game different (except for you save cloners )

True, variety is not a bad thing. That's the main reason I suggested the .22LR. It's a very common gun with very common ammunition that might (barely) bring down a wolf if you hit it perfectly but it's really a rabbit/grouse gun. If I had to choose between a .22 and a .303 or a 12 gauge and a .303 it would definitely increase game variety and make ammunition drops a little more interesting. A light weight firearm that's no good verus deer/bears versus the heavy, powerful rifle...

Still, I am adamantly opposed to handguns of any type. Yes, some trappers do carry them for protection but you will not find the average Canadian in possession of a hand cannon. Ammunition would be non-existent. Shotguns are far more likely since they are, like the .22LR, a common hunting gun. I also would disagree with the birdshot and slugs variable ammunition option. Not because it's unrealistic - quite the opposite really - but just to prevent people from min/maxing. If I can use a shotgun to kill everything just by swapping ammo than I'm no longer faced with choices and consequences am I?

[Boston123]

I agree with cekivi AND Boston123 (in part).

It doesn't NEED hand guns. But, adding variety and increasing rarity would make each playthough more different than they are now. It's not about providing choices....it's about forcing them :twisted: Living with the consequences of your actions is part of what makes this game different (except for you save cloners )

True, variety is not a bad thing. That's the main reason I suggested the .22LR. It's a very common gun with very common ammunition that might (barely) bring down a wolf if you hit it perfectly but it's really a rabbit/grouse gun. If I had to choose between a .22 and a .303 or a 12 gauge and a .303 it would definitely increase game variety and make ammunition drops a little more interesting. A light weight firearm that's no good verus deer/bears versus the heavy, powerful rifle...

Still, I am adamantly opposed to handguns of any type. Yes, some trappers do carry them for protection but you will not find the average Canadian in possession of a hand cannon. Ammunition would be non-existent. Shotguns are far more likely since they are, like the .22LR, a common hunting gun. I also would disagree with the birdshot and slugs variable ammunition option. Not because it's unrealistic - quite the opposite really - but just to prevent people from min/maxing. If I can use a shotgun to kill everything just by swapping ammo than I'm no longer faced with choices and consequences am I?

.38 Special, a "hand cannon"? :lol: That is funny. Oh, and our survivor ISN'T the "average Canadian". They are bush pilots, the very people who would be the most likely to carry a revolver for self-defense. AS for ammunition availability: you get 12, 6 in the cylinder and 6 on the holster. It would be meant for early-game self-defense, not as a life-long tool like the rifle or bow. NOTE: In the early Pre-Alpha footage, the character was equipped with a .38 Special revolver.

You have to actually HAVE the ammunition before you can swap it out, correct? And if there is a greater variance of ammunition spawning, then the chances of finding the ammunition you want becomes less, not greater. Having a variance of ammunition is the very definition of choices and consequences. Couple that with ammunition actually being rare and ......

Take all the current "ammo spawns" and split them among 4 different ammo types: .303 rifle, 12G buck, 12G bird, and 12G slug. You aren't going to have people sitting on top of 50+ rounds of rifle ammo any more, like they do currently. That means you can't just miss shots and "eat the loss", like they do currently.

[cekivi]

I also think you may be overestimating our character's desire to have a handgun. While getting the licenses for long guns (shotguns and rifles) is relatively trivial there is a lot of additional licensing and paperwork required to posses a handgun. It would be more likely (and less of a headache with the feds) to have a double barreled shotgun or a collapsible .22LR in your plane than the .38 Special.

Also, I agree with you argument versus ammunition. I just think simpler is still better to prevent min/maxing. Because assuming your 50 rounds are divided evenly that still gives me 24 shells that can take down large game (slugs and buckshot) and 12 for rabbits. I'd rather have the main consideration with firearms remain as weight versus utility.

[toebar]

It's true than hand guns are less common here (and I've argued this exact issue in previous threads), but they're not non-existent. We can skip the paper work and bush pilot arguments entirely and point simply to law enforcement/security forces a plausible source for a handgun. (Also preppers-- anyone with the dedication/mania required to build an underground bunker is definitely a good candidate for obtaining a handgun legally or otherwise)

[SteveP]

I don't think more weapons are essential for the game however in very long games, one eventually runs low of bullets, arrows and metal so I've suggested stone tools. I do agree that an atlatl would be a complex technique that would need much practice in game to master.

Atlatl: how to throw

If there are too many weapons, the game play would suffer and not be challenging enough for the majority of experienced players.

We are nearing the release of Story Mode and the final release. Just coaching that don't hope too much for new features. I do think there is a lot of room for more features in the future so either Hinterland should do it or a competitor will.

[SteveP]

While getting the licenses for long guns (shotguns and rifles) is relatively trivial there is a lot of additional licensing and paperwork required to posses a handgun.

In Canada you are not permitted to carry a handgun in the bush for bear defense unless perhaps you are a park ranger or you have an occupation that requires you to spend long periods in the bushand then you need a specific authorization to carry (ATC) which species exactly where and when you may transport or use the handgun. Just hunting, fishing or camping is not a good enough reason. A bush pilot could conceivably have a legitimate reason to carry a hand gun as kit in the airplane. Judging from the number of permits to carry side arms, it is not generally done.

Applications to carry handguns in B.C. and Alberta

[cekivi]

Judging from the number of permits to carry side arms, it is not generally done.

Applications to carry handguns in B.C. and Alberta

Exactly. The only national exception to the rule are trappers (http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-f ... ge-eng.htm) and even then registration and additional permits are required.

[toebar]

If you want to go through the effort of getting the right training and paperwork, and have a job that can regularly expose you to dangerous wildlife (not just trappers), there's a chance of approval for carrying a restricted firearm in BC. And others carry them illegally.

But let me stress this is a very small proportion of people!

[JACKHAMMERMC]

I agree with anyone who is saying we need more weapons but I don't think it should be firearms.

I like the fact that we only have the rare find of a hunting rifle and that the bow is so hard to make and when you'd add even more firearms it would take away the struggle to get all the stuff to make yourself a tool to defend yourself with.

Now having said that I wouldn't mind seeing an additional 2 possible extra weapons.

Suggestion 1: Simply a rock, you should be able to find small rocks laying about (can't harvest big rocks just like you can't chop down a tree) and throw these rocks. By throwing the rock it should be able to kill rabbits, scare wolfs away but not fatally harm them and be absolutely useless to a bear. (Make the rocks heavy enough so players won't take too many of them, suggested weight 1kg).

Suggestion 2: A tomahawk, you know the stone throwing axes. Now this could be a tool that requires crafting for which I suggest the following items needed. 1x rock, 1x reclaimed wood and 2x cured gut to attach the rock to the wood. This should not make it too easy to make but still an extra way of defending yourself (the actual durability should also be balanced to X amount of throws). (Suggested weight 2.5kg)

[Schaumrolle24]

Many bushpilots in Alaska carry .38 Special revolvers for defense from wolves or other "small" predators. A lightweight revolver that can be tucked under a bushplane seat isn't exactly gamebreaking. Asides, it would be really difficult to hunt with a .38 Special, meaning the only real use for it is for defense against charging wolves.

I, for one, find it face-palmingly annoying that ALL the ammunition we find magically fits into every rifle, which is itself always the same. Having some variety would

1) make the player actually make CHOICES when it comes to equipment, and

2) be more true-to-life.

A big +1 for that, mate!

But I am not convinced about different ammotypes for shotguns itself. 3 types of (firearm) ammo would be adequate for a survival game. Revolver-, rifle ammo and just buckshot.

I don't like the "allrounder"-idea for the shotgun. Even a side by side shotgun could be hard to balance, game breaking and would further increase the types of ammo, when it has 3 different shells for itself.

[cekivi]

I still think two types of ammunition (rife and shotgun) would make the desired ammo rare enough to result in interesting mechanics. Still against any handguns being included for numerous reasons.

I do like JACKHAMMERMC's idea though of improvised weapons. Trowing rocks (or even branches so there's some reason to interact with them) would be a really neat idea. Especially if there was a chance to both aggravate or terrorize the wolf you're throwing the rocks at

[toebar]

I like the fact that we only have the rare find of a hunting rifle and that the bow is so hard to make and when you'd add even more firearms it would take away the struggle to get all the stuff to make yourself a tool to defend yourself with.

I would agree with you-- IF this was true. The fact is, you will always find a bunch of rifles.

Having more types of weapons is different than have a higher quantity of weapons... and I don't think there is any one suggesting a higher quantity of weapons-- exactly for your reasons above

To do this, we could just make the rifle rarer and add no other weapons. Its a valid way to do it.

Another way is to keep the quantity of weapons about the same (or less) but split that quantity into different types. This has a few benefits:

1. More realistic (take or leave this argument )

2. Encourages different styles of play -- the player has to react to which weapon they have.

3. This adds depth to the game, and adds to the survival feel IMO -- using what you can find, not waiting to find a rifle.

[JACKHAMMERMC]

I like the fact that we only have the rare find of a hunting rifle and that the bow is so hard to make and when you'd add even more firearms it would take away the struggle to get all the stuff to make yourself a tool to defend yourself with.

I would agree with you-- IF this was true. The fact is, you will always find a bunch of rifles.

Having more types of weapons is different than have a higher quantity of weapons... and I don't think there is any one suggesting a higher quantity of weapons-- exactly for your reasons above

To do this, we could just make the rifle rarer and add no other weapons. Its a valid way to do it.

Another way is to keep the quantity of weapons about the same (or less) but split that quantity into different types. This has a few benefits:

1. More realistic (take or leave this argument )

2. Encourages different styles of play -- the player has to react to which weapon they have.

3. This adds depth to the game, and adds to the survival feel IMO -- using what you can find, not waiting to find a rifle.

I agree with you about the smaller amount of rifles perhaps (2 instead of 4/5 per area, ammo amounts seem good though), but I don't think we need extra types of firearms. More improvised weapons like a tomahawk etc.. would be cool, might just be me but I like the crafting aspect in survival.

Again, just an opinion and I'm happy with your counters ;-)

[Sinthoras]

While handguns and shotguns would be cool my #1 request is that they make maybe 20-30% of the rifles spawn with scopes for two reasons: 1) The current iron sights are very difficult to get used to 2) I love rare loot

While I am not asking for weapons or ammo to become any more common, it would be cool to add a bit of progression with weapons, to make it more like clothing progression.

For example, with clothing it often goes something like Vest -> Ski Jacket -> Winter coat -> Wolfskin Coat and there is a gradual progression.

With weapons it is more or less a checkmark box: Rifle or No Rifle. I would just love for there to be some rarer, incrementally better firearms to add excitement to the game. It's one more reason to actually WANT to explore the whole world rather than set up camp in one area.

In essence, it always feels great to find better gear, so why not add a few more tiers? Not saying I want to make the game easier, I would just love more exciting loot. They can start out by making worse, slightly more common versions of the rifle (Beat up Rifle, etc), making the current rifle more exciting to find for all I care, I just love variety

[cekivi]

With weapons it is more or less a checkmark box: Rifle or No Rifle. I would just love for there to be some rarer, incrementally better firearms to add excitement to the game. It's one more reason to actually WANT to explore the whole world rather than set up camp in one area.

I agree. That would also be a cool way to add variety/choice to the game without a lot of extra effort on the part of the developers.

[Spyrothedragon2015]

I think that the game would benefit from more weapons like spears, maybe a pistol of some kind i.e. a revolver, maybe as a rare find a bear trap.

[knightjoke]

1+

[Smeden]

On 1/25/2016 at 9:46 AM, Dirmagnos said:

Trees ARE rocksolid. And they ARE completely frozen thru.

There is a reason why there is no trees in Antarctica and one of those is extremely cold weather. With constant temperatures dropping pretty much every night below -40 in game, they will freeze thru in matter of days. There is no circulation of nutrients under those conditions.

Even if winter were to end, most of the forest would end up dead.

Youd have greater chance to fall a tree if you go at it with a big bat, instead of an axe. While they are solid, they are also fragile and you may have better chance at breaking it, rather than cutting it down.

Even if you will fall a tree, then you need a saw(that we dont have) to cut it(pls dont even joke about using a hatchet/axe). And it would take quite a lot of calories and time even with warmer weather.

Since most trees were/alive alive prior to incident youd have to dry them for a month be4 youd be able to use them without dying from co2 poisoning.

Best bet would be going for dead trees, since they had no circulation in them to begin with, plus cold will do rather good job at breaking them, plus they wont require as much time to dry. Altho we again run into "no saw" problem.

As with many aspects of game, most people completely discard effect that extreme cold has on various objects and view the issue from the standpoint of just low(but not extremely low) temperatures.

Been gone awhile but am back now.  We're not talking about the Antarctic here, we're talking about an area in Canada that according to the game will reach ambient temperatures above freezing.  Also, the current weather conditions in game are part of the event that brings the game about by my understanding.  Logic therefore dictates that within those parameters, the trees are not rock solid all the way through.

Occasionally you will get a night as cold as -40, especially if it's storming and heavy winds, but keep in mind that's windchill factor in affect as well.  Typically the game ranges from -13'ish to about 8 during the day depending on the weather and wind, this is during the beginning.  Once geared up even a -25 day can still feel like 5.

Saw not required, would be nice, just with Axe would mean more waste, which could be used as tender....win, win....

The extreme cold isn't constant, it does fluctuate, otherwise the game would be a very short one and you could forget travelling to different zones with starting clothes and again, the event just happened.  It's not like this has been going for years, months or even weeks yet.

[AHGoodwin]

+1 for spear. Makes more sense someone with no experience could make a spear... IRL I wouldn't know how to make a bow that worked, or arrows that actually shoot straight, never mind be able to hit anything with it without considerable practice. Why can't I use some cured gut to attach my spare hunting knife to a branch???? 

[RedGuy]

The story mode trailer seems to suggest that we'll be able to use our hatchet as a weapon, which I'd very much like. Sometimes I find it a bit odd that we can't pull it out when a wolf gets to close, it's better than no weapon.

1+ spear as well. A hunting knife on a stick!